Snapdragon 600 - GPU Performance

On the GPU side of Snapdragon 600 we're still looking at Adreno 320, which is easily Qualcomm's first highly competitive GPU. At its launch, Qualcomm claimed the Adreno 320 clocks in Snapdragon 600 could be higher than what we saw in S4 Pro/APQ8064. To find out, we turned to our trusty GLBenchmark suite.

The good news is that none of the thermal throttling we saw on the APQ8064 based Nexus 4 was present on the HTC One. Curiously enough, the thermald.conf file is now stored as a binary file - which means we can't get direct access to it. Either way, although the One can get warm during heavy CPU/GPU workloads, it doesn't throttle while running GLBenchmark which meant our freezer can remain on food cooling duties for this review.

Here we see a small increase in fill rate compared to the Nexus 4, roughly 14%.

The beauty of being on a 1080p display is that GLBench's on and offscreen tests produce roughly similar results as they are both run at 1080p. The offscreen results do have vsync disabled though.

Very similar triangle throughput to the Nexus 4, and a bit lower than the Nexus 4 freezer test, which implies that Qualcomm is doing a better job of keeping GPU clocks under control in Snapdragon 600.

The "game" benchmarks in GLBench give us a good indication of overall performance. The offscreen results are most interesting from drawing comparative conclusions:

The One is fast - it's now the fastest smartphone we've ever tested in the Egypt HD offscreen test. The margin over the Nexus 4 however makes me believe that we're talking about very small increases in GPU frequency at best (either that or better thermal management).

The Egypt Classic results are equally impressive. Here we're seeing about a 12% increase in performance compared to the APQ8064 based Optimus G, so at best we may be talking about a 15% increase in frequencies - or again, just better thermal management (or a combination of the two). Given the fact that process node hasn't changed at all, I think a small clock speed boost wouldn't be unreasonable to expect from the 600's Adreno 320. It's very clear that thermal management has improved though.

Post Your Comment

626 Comments

Sigh .... you seems to have a misconception that Aluminium is a better material than Plastic composites? You do know that Aluminium is one of the softer and weaker and cheapest metal around? Unless they start using stainless steel, please tone down the exuberant over what is essential a very cheap and basic material in the engineering world.

While I do not think Samsung uses top range composites (that are expensive AND can rival the properties of top range metals, although not usually all at the same time), from the reviews, it seems that the plastics used are consistently more scratch proof AND tougher than the aluminium used, which is so prone to dent and scuffing that you need to a cover over it at all times.Reply

As for the camera, you are right in saying that it is a compromise and trade off instead of a glowing fanboyish review like so many other reviewers. And in terms of trade off, it works if the person only wants to share over the web (and not to large screen format either, else it really really look horrible) or view their photos over small format viewers.

But for most consumers who wants to print their photos, view it on their 17 inch HD laptop display or otherwise needs large format printout, it is a no go as the lack of details really really show, especially when the composition have lots of details or words/numbers. It is so bad that it can really detract from the overall quality of the photo, if it is enlarged and viewed over a large display or printed out onto just an A4 size paper. ( I tried both using the review images that claims to be the actual full size).Reply

You do realize there are no 17-inch laptops in existence with displays that have more pixels than this camera sensor? The only laptop with a screen resolution greater than 4 megapixels is the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display. Also, prints up to 5"x9" could still be output at 150 LPI from a 300 DPI source.

So yeah, the camera in this phone isn't exactly the same quality as a DSLR, but it is very well suited for "most consumers".Reply

You people need to calm down with the bashing of this review. Anandtech also reviewed SGS2 and it was highly praised, REMEMBER? If you don't accept that a company other than samsung can produce an excellent device than I'm sorry but you are a fanboy. HTC is an excellent device. Period.Reply

17 Pages and only one on UI? How can I have just read every comment and yet nobody speaks with surprise about this amazing lack in an otherwise exceptional review?

I'm purchasing this phone, and I like it for many of the same reasons Brian gives. I respect this review and yet…

The UI is probably more important to the experience than all of the hardware; It's at least as important. Yet we receive one of the slimmest run-throughs of Sense 5.0 I've come across. I was hoping this indicated a companion review…but weeks in and there remains no Sense 5.0 review. What sacrifices are made by the lack of Jellybean 4.2.2? How do the quick-access functions differ from main competitors (silence, notifications, etc.)? How does the browser stack-up (it's an internet device after-all)? There is not even a quick breakdown or reminder of the main bullet-points for any of these significant topics, though apparently we need a refresher on all sorts of other things, hardware based of course.

Moreover, the obvious competitor to this phone [GS4] has built its efforts with a particularly strong focus on software tweaks. But evaluating the phone's hardware with such heavy emphasis…the very battleground most-contended is largely ignored, making the real-world use of this review questionable. Did anyone really wonder if the HTC ONE was going for build-quality? Did we need this review to figure that out? It seems two-thirds of the review speaks the language of the obvious, the fact obfuscated in magnificent detail...Detail that almost no bearing on purchase-decision. I love that kind of detail, but I certainly wouldn't want in to substitute the meat of what determines a review's real-world value: Should I buy this?

As a doc on technology, and to learn about the development of hardware, this is a fantastic piece. But in that sense [pun!] it is like a case-subject for technological education in general, industry education or even archiving. It's akin to the [deservedly beloved] engineerguyvideo series. That isn't for purchase decision, unless the reader is swayed by being lost in the brilliant and impressive information-overload, information that ultimately…isn't the right context.

Context…that fails to address the blogosphere. We see no redress to the rumors of QC issues with gaps, no mentioning of availability or carrier-exclusivity. No discussion of carrier-comparison at all. No setting-the-record-straight with regard to inaccuracies in well-published reviews. No discussion on sticking points for many reviewers (such as the difficulty in customizing the home-screen with an awkward increase in dragging, pausing, dropping). …Part of the advantage to such a late review is to address all the other reviews and opinions now out there--but this one seems largely in a vaccum. Those concerns floated to the top, virally, for good reason. With each further review the gaps [pun!] they all share become more apparent. Here we have the best review to-date, but it's merely rehashing what we've already seen, just at a finer level. The community is asking questions this review still does not begin to address.

Then there are the sort of flaws we'd expect when one reviewer attempts to 'do it all'. No single person designed this phone, and a single reviewer expecting to be minute in detail and *definitive* in their review is not likely to succeed. So we see the claim:

...that larger photosites are best to fight noise; Despite his expertise in this specific area Brian continues this simplistic and ultimately false refrain. Technology does not develop uniformly, and the nature of noise is multi-faceted. All things being equal bigger photosites are best. But…all things are not equal. Increasingly the best real-world strategy for fighting noise has been an *increase* in pixel count up to our current limits. This is from page 46 of the comment section, and many here would do well to read it:

**sigsegv0x0b - Monday, April 08, 2013 - link

There is only one problem with HTC's ultra pixels. DXO Mark seems to disagree

People have said the HTC ONE is just flash and form over function. Another iDevice [if you believe the common anti-fanperson's refrain]. I think it has stellar function, and again--this will be my next phone--but admittedly it does trade some real-world practicality for that build 'quality' [and here I thought quality was something built right, not something built to give the appearance of right]. The phone has a smaller screen [but I think that bezel will protect against errant contact] and they could have used that extra wiggle-room to protect the glass from all sides…instead they used the same glass expanse as the GS4, just with a large able unused portion. That's form over function...and over build-quality. No SD-card and the poor excuse they couldn't fit it in. The GS4 does. The Sony Xperia Z does, even though it's water-proof. The metal will not be comfortable in the sun (glare, hot to the touch) so when you place it on your accessory car-dock…make certain it isn't catching rays the whole time across its various edges. The metal will not be comfortable in the cold (now we have a reason not to wear gloves with this phone…and to wear gloves with this phone). The battery…ugh. I replace my phone every year and I still think this is an obvious misstep. Even the iPhone, while not user-replaceable, has a battery that a service technician can remove. It's clear that with the ONE many more phones will need to be fully replaced over otherwise minor fixes. I'd pay money to have this phone *not* constructed in this manner. I'll take a subtly rubberized exterior, please.

This review is being celebrated as some sort of benchmark. It is…with regards to hardware. I'd hate to see the ball dropped so heavily on the software side by its blogger-imitators. This review, with its undue focus on the physical object, and its stark glossing over of the actual battlefield this phone faces, shares the same superficiality. Well made [review/phone]? Yep. Like an Armani Jacket. Functional [review/phone]? Not as much as it might have been…had the focus been on wearability.Reply

I HAVE USED THE PHONE. It is extremely solid, really nice looking, VERY fast, Browser is very fast. Apps open instantly, screen is bright and sharp, it's very thin and fits the pocket well. Sound is better than any phone I've heard. Camera is fast and gets great shots that you would not be able to get with other phones. Stop fanboy trashing to start rumours. Nobody wants to hear your biased bull****.Reply

Maybe the comment system is messing up, or maybe you are responding to the wrong comment by accident, or maybe you just didn't read my [admittedly] lengthy comment...but I'm no fanboy. Not biased. Not much anything like what you're saying.Reply